In the Schweser notes on page 83, it states the following as RECOMMENDATIONS:
Verified firms should include the following disclosure language: “[Insert name of firm] has been verified for the periods [insert dates] by [name of verifier]. A copy of the veriification report is available upon request.”
I thought that this language was REQUIRED when there is a 3rd party verifier, as opposed to recommended. As in I know that 3rd party verification is not required, but I thought that when there is a 3rd party verifier, the language is a set template just like when the firm claims compliance.作者: comp_sci_kid 时间: 2013-4-22 11:03
I’ve never seen anything in the standards about naming the verification firm in the compliance statement.作者: waldziuchna 时间: 2013-4-22 11:04
verification prcoess is recommended.
once decide to being verified, whole firm is required to be verified.作者: yuoska 时间: 2013-4-22 11:05
the following statement is excluded from 2012 curriculum…. so forget about it
Verified firms should include the following disclosure language: “[Insert name of firm] has been verified for the periods [insert dates] by [name of verifier]. A copy of the veriification report is available upon request.”
